44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 16, 2023 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, but I disagree with his ideology.
We see this bill as being more about the facts, about things that have happened. I think the Conservatives are spreading a lot of disinformation. I would like to point out that hunting weapons are for hunting, not for shooting sprees, so they are not included in this bill. I would like the Conservatives to actually read the bill so they can tell us more about it.
82 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, Bill C-21, which has come back to the House from the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security with a number of amendments, is a bit better than its original version, but it is still far from perfect. Some people are still dissatisfied with its current form, and it does not meet the expectations of certain groups. I would even say that Bill C-21, in its current form, is very disappointing to many people.
Let me be clear. When the bill was introduced in May 2022, it was nowhere near ready.
Let us be frank. The government only introduced it because it was riding the wave of support for gun control in the wake of the shooting in Uvalde, Texas. The proof is that the government had to introduce a package of amendments to its own bill in the fall of 2022. More than 400 pages of amendments were tabled in the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security after the study was already completed. These amendments caused discontent and concern among some groups, including hunters and members of indigenous communities.
Let us not forget that these amendments were presented without any explanation, without any briefings and without a press conference. Even the Liberal members of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security seemed unable to explain these amendments.
It is important to remember the facts. These amendments included new measures to take action on ghost guns as well as a definition of prohibited assault-style firearms and a list of prohibited firearms that was over 300 pages long. The Bloc Québécois was opposed to including the list in the Criminal Code because it made it unnecessarily burdensome. The Criminal Code does not reflect in real time the models of firearms and their classification since it needs to be amended. An additional 482 models of weapons would have been prohibited by this list. However, the government could very well have done this through an order in council, as it has done in the past. The result is that the pro-gun groups were easily able to strike fear into the hearts of hunters, who looked at the list and saw their own weapons there. However, the list included both legal and prohibited weapons, depending on the calibre.
It is important to remember that the government did not consult with major hunting associations. Hunters had major concerns following the government's botched announcement of amendments in the fall of 2022. Thanks to the work and interventions of the Bloc Québécois, the confusing list was withdrawn, as was the reference to “hunting rifle” in the definition of assault weapons.
Hunting is a passion for many people in my riding. It is a major economic driver for towns like Senneterre and Chibougamau and northern Quebec. I could go on and on, because my riding covers 800,000 square kilometres.
As a result of our efforts, the Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs said that it was satisfied. The Bloc Québécois put pressure on the government to remove that ill-advised mention of hunting rifles from the definition and leave them out of the picture altogether.
I thank my colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia for her excellent work in committee.
In short, by doing such a bad job of presenting its amendments, the government predictably raised the ire of hunters. Members had to wait several days for a technical briefing to explain the content of the amendments. Since the amendments were tabled at the clause-by-clause stage, the committee had heard from witnesses on things that had nothing to do with assault weapons. The study was complete when the government completely changed the scope of the bill. That was when the Bloc Québécois proposed to reopen the study so that experts could come testify about assault-style weapons.
In the end, as a result of the outcry from the public, indigenous peoples and Liberal and NDP members, the government withdrew its own amendments in early 2023 and went back to the drawing board.
In commenting on Bill C‑21, professor and political scientist Geneviève Tellier said, “Not everyone agrees with this new version of the legislation. Ultimately, it further polarizes the debate between those who are in favour of the right to have firearms and those who say we must limit them because they cause unfortunate victims.”
Professor Tellier said that the government cannot reconcile these two groups' wishes. What is more, she believes that the victims, including the victims of the Polytechnique massacre and the Quebec City shooting, were expecting their concerns to be considered.
She stated, and I quote: Let us not forget that this was also a Liberal election promise. It is a bit of broken promise from the [Prime Minister], in the sense that it does not go as far as he promised during the election. These people expected the government to send a strong message of zero tolerance. Instead, the government seems to be saying that it did what it could, but it cannot do everything it promised. That is why these amendments are leaving many people unsatisfied—
The same political scientist also said the Liberals' approach was dictacted by vote pandering.
It is important to remember that throughout the process, the government refused very reasonable proposals from the Bloc Québécois, proposals that would have produced a better bill. Throughout the process, the government did a poor job and created a tempest of its own making. However, we must admit that, thanks to the Bloc Québécois's work, the bill, which was initially criticized by hunters, gun control groups and airsoft aficionados, was improved and is now satisfactory for most of these groups.
The dangerous slippery slope of Bill C-21 on gun control is simply the result of poor planning and sloppy consultation by the Liberals.
Amendments were reintroduced on May 2, 2023. The government scrapped the list that was causing so much confusion and anger. It also removed the reference to “hunting rifle” from the definition, which was causing a lot of fear among hunters even though, technically, the term was appropriate.
These new government amendments have reassured hunters, but they have also angered gun control groups like PolyRemembers and the Quebec City mosque survivors.
The government's new definition for assault weapons is prospective, meaning that it covers only future firearms. The 482 models of firearms that had been designated by the government as assault weapons in its never-ending list are therefore not banned. The government prefers to defer to an advisory committee, which it will establish.
However, many of these firearms have similar characteristics to the AR‑15 and are not at all used for hunting. It would have been utterly ridiculous for the government to keep these firearms legal when it banned more than 2,000 by regulation on May 1, 2020.
The Bloc Québécois has called on the government to immediately ban the 470 models that are not used for hunting and to ask the advisory committee about the 12 models that are potentially used for hunting, such as the popular SKS, which has often been used in killings.
During the last election campaign, PolyRemembers backed the Liberal Party as the only party that could improve gun control. The group welcomed Bill C‑21 as an important step forward. The group also welcomed the automatic revocation for domestic abuse, including emotional abuse.
The survivors of the Quebec City mosque shooting also welcomed this bill. Let us recall that the shooter burst into the mosque with an assault weapon that jammed and committed a massacre with a handgun. Later, they learned that the Liberals had promised that they would amend the bill to add a definition prohibiting assault weapons. The Liberals finally backed down by adopting a less robust and prospective definition and not immediately prohibiting the 482 models identified as being assault weapons.
On the other hand, the Bloc Québécois's proposal to immediately prohibit by decree the 470 or so models that are not reasonably used by hunters would address the concerns of these groups. As I said earlier, we are asking the government to have the advisory committee that it wants to re-establish look at the dozen assault weapons that are potentially used for hunting.
We should also note that the bill freezes the acquisition of legal handguns, but we will have to wait many years before all these guns are gone through attrition. Unfortunately, the number of illegal guns will continue to grow.
In closing, I want to say that, even though Bill C‑21 is not perfect, the Bloc Québécois will be voting in favour of it. It is just unfortunate that the government ignored some good suggestions from the Bloc Québécois and broke its election promises. Let us remember the tragic events that have occurred, the lives that have been lost and the families who have lost loved ones because of assault weapons and illegal firearms.
1575 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his questions. I agree that the Conservatives are spreading disinformation.
This was a collaborative effort. The Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security tried to make this bill into one that will at least keep people safe and prevent the use of weapons used in mass killings. It is important to have a gun control bill.
Hunting rifles are not affected at all. Once again, the Conservatives are spreading disinformation and propaganda.
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the Conservatives did not read Bill C‑21. They are unaware of what it contains. I am certain that, even in committee, they were not listening to what the members of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security had to say about Bill C‑21.
I just want to remind the Conservative Party that the important thing is that hunting rifles are not affected by the ban.
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is indeed very important to talk about what the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security did to improve this bill. As I was saying, we are getting rid of assault weapons and illegal firearms.
The bill is not perfect, but I am sure that it will be improved. It is important to pass this bill and it is important to point out that hunting rifles are not included in Bill C‑21.
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
